Units

[painfulsunrise]

I don't know if this has been posted before, but I would like to know full unit rosters.

My hopes are that AoW will by far exceed expectations as far as units and buildings go.

A flaw I found with EALA's C&C:G and C&C:G:ZH is that there were not that many buildable units.

Sure there were a bunch, but half the fun is being able to use tons of different units. You can have different strategies, ect.

Now, I know that there are public beta testers, and I'm not asking for a leak, but how much can we expect and what can we expect?

[NOTE; I did read that there are over 100 units. That's pretty impressive.]

I'm really looking forward to this game. :D

[PsychePsyche]

A lot.

Your brain = :boom:!

:biggringr

[painfulsunrise]

hahaha!

Man oh man.

I know that there is more than C&C:G/C&C:G:ZH just from the videos, and screenies.

Thank God!

I'm still curious what we'll be able to... erm.. play with :D

[AgmLauncher]

You run into redundancy with too many units though, and in order to avoid redundancy, you end up creating units such that they do one very specific task, even if that means countering one specific unit that no other unit can counter. That makes it quite frustrating. I think CCG and ZH had a decent amount of different units. A good player who mixed rather than spammed had enough different units to keep him busy, you'd have to be super human to adequately use (and therefore justify) an overdose of units.

[BOMBLORD]

so can one of the bate testers tell me,the game will be more tactical ,or more arcade stylish ?

[T-bone]

i hope more acade :biggringr :biggringr :biggringr :biggringr

[TanKilleR]

Originally posted by BOMBLORD
so can one of the bate testers tell me,the game will be more tactical ,or more arcade stylish ?

Ya know,I dont think I have seen a true tactical game since RA1, CCG sure was not one, Even RA2&TS had its faults. I'd trade all the flashly bells and wisles for a true RTS with true tactical fighting, non of this bs tank rush ****.:biggringr

[painfulsunrise]

From what I gather is AoW will be a Tatical game. Using better AIs, tatics, ect.

[Duncsta]

Good. Its true that most of these games have become tank rush but I must remind TanKiller that RA1 was kind of the same way (Still it was one of the best strat games ever - I still enjoy a good LANed RA1 game). Tanks in most games now just roll over infantry and make them redundant - I really hope they dont do that in AoW.

[painfulsunrise]

Actually infantry will play a major role in this game.

The developers have said that if you use just tanks you will figure out what a bad tactic that is because enemy infantry can strike you from all over.

Infantry will be realistic in the sense that they can be run-over as well.

[painfulsunrise]

Also, in my opinion, the more units the better.

That way you can choose units that can operate for different tatical operations. There would be more combinations and strategies available.

Less units = limited strategy

More units = unlimited strategy

[Duncsta]

Thank god that infantry will have a decent role. And a variety of units is good but too much choice is bad and redundant - as many members have already said and with whom im inclined to agree. somewhere inbetween might be good, between too few and too many units.

[AgmLauncher]

Originally posted by TanKilleR
Ya know,I dont think I have seen a true tactical game since RA1, CCG sure was not one, Even RA2&TS had its faults. I'd trade all the flashly bells and wisles for a true RTS with true tactical fighting, non of this bs tank rush ****.:biggringr

CCG was way more tactical than RA1. RA1 was tank rush, CCG actually suffered from a LACK of good tanks. Gatt/TH from China owned. CCG took enormous skill, tactics, micro, and solid BOs to beat another decent player.

[I3ag_OF_I3ones]

Alot of units=bad tactics because of rock paper scissors syndrome and tier 1 unit=usless paradox just like in warcraft. If you look at generals, game might not have alot of units but almost of everything it has has to be used extensively through out the game. In warcraft once you reach high tech levels, making ghouls or footmen is pointless. Generals didnt have such things as one unit replacing other and that was the beauty of it. China needed its red guards as USA needed its rangers same as GLA needed technicals and rebels when they allready had battlebuses and buggies and all sorts of gay ****. RTS games based on modern warfare should take into account that its not age of empires or rise of nations and all units that come in begining and in the end all do important roles in wining the war.

[painfulsunrise]

Originally posted by I3ag_OF_I3ones
Alot of units=bad tactics because of rock paper scissors syndrome and tier 1 unit=usless paradox just like in warcraft. If you look at generals, game might not have alot of units but almost of everything it has has to be used extensively through out the game. In warcraft once you reach high tech levels, making ghouls or footmen is pointless. Generals didnt have such things as one unit replacing other and that was the beauty of it. China needed its red guards as USA needed its rangers same as GLA needed technicals and rebels when they allready had battlebuses and buggies and all sorts of gay ****. RTS games based on modern warfare should take into account that its not age of empires or rise of nations and all units that come in begining and in the end all do important roles in wining the war.

Thank you! :D

[Duncsta]

What you say is correct but the thing I found is that in Generals, very few people built infantry and opted for the armour instead. In AoW if there is something like the flashbangs for the americans, I hope they change it from the Generals ones. In Generals I could see just one ranger launch (thats they way it looked even though they are suppose to be thrown) a single flashbang and that one ranger could hold off like 5 or 10 red guards with that flashbang ability. It was abit over powered and not even accurate - flashbangs stun for like 10secs - not kill enemy troops. There should be a limit to the number they carry (even if its not flashbangs - maybe its frag gernades or what not). Although maybe flashbangs would be great for taking prisioners if you can stun them properly. . .

[AgmLauncher]

What you say is correct but the thing I found is that in Generals, very few people built infantry and opted for the armour instead

Then those people werent playing the game right. At the top levels of play, every unit was used and was useful. The USA Missile Defender was an all around awesome unit. It was useful in both early game and late game against tech units. Tech/rpg was very powerful, gatt/th/tc was very powerful. Ranger's were not overpowered in Gens. They needed to be that good because the Gattling Tank was insane and no ranger would survive long enough to kill an acceptable number of tank hunters with a gattling tank in the area.

If people didnt play CCG right, then it can lead to a lot of bad impressions, but CCG at top levels of play (balance issues aside), was an amazingly well designed game. Every unit had a use. Looking at ZH where they tried to add in more units, the problem of redundancy that Bag of Bones and I are talking about is true. USA has virtually no use for the Microwave Tanks and Sentry Drone for example.

[Duncsta]

Yea they might have made it redundant with the unit addition - although for most if not all RTS' an expansion pack add units and thus it might have started to become a pre-requisit to some minds. . .adding units if its just for the sake of adding units isnt always good. . .

A question: I resently read that the Ak74 infantry for the consortium can get upgraded to RPG (I read this on Gamespy) so this means that you just upgrade each man at a time for an RPG - Is there no AT troop class like in most RTS (I actually think that this move could be cool)?

[AgmLauncher]

It will certainly make the consortium very powerful if you can upgrade the units individually. In-the-field upgradability, especially upgrades that change the purpose of the unit, is a very powerful feature for a faction. You wont be caught saying "oh ****, I wish I had built some RPGs".

[MetalPhoenix]

Well, as long as the infantry don't get technical syndrome (built very quickly and cheaply, AND own ridiculously hard when spammed, even more so when upgraded) I'm fine with it.

As for units, too many units isn't a good idea. ZH had a good combination of units: each main faction had two tanks (neither of whcih was meant as a replacement for the other), just enough specialist units (Pathfinder, Toxin Tractor, etc.) and some multipurpose units (Humvee, Quad Cannon, Dragon Tank, and so on).

Too many units=redundancy, which is bad. As long as there is one, maybe two units for every role, I'm happy

[BOMBLORD]

I wish that the early game units could be upgraded,so they will be effective also in late-game.(and not just being canon fodders or something)

[Nuclear Whale]

I pray to god that they give a realistic impersonation of Infantry in the game...just take a look at Generals. They should have called it "Panzer Attack 2020" rather then an actual "Modern-day warfare". In real life, you dont just send in a "crapload" of tanks in Fallujah and hope you destory the insurgent "construction site". No, you send in platoons of well organized infantry, combined with both Air and ground support, to go out and perform well organized and planned operations.

For in real life, the tanks support the infantry, not the other way around.

[AgmLauncher]

Lol, I dont know how you played CCG, if you spammed nothing but tanks, you would get completely owned by anyone who's good. Making mass tanks is stupid.

[Nuclear Whale]

um actually, thats the whole point of the game....

Go ahead, try to actually WIN just by actually using real tactics...just try.

Because last time I checked, cramming together a bunch of Gattling Tanks and Tankhunters isnt reli stragety...it just takes a quick hand.

(Side note: i was impressed with AOW, as it is a step forward in the RTS genre)

[vicious6]

I would say they're heading in the right direction, in my opinion the way to make infantry useful on the battlefield is varied equipment, and special abilities. Look how much was accomplished just by adding the crawl ability to infantry... they could sneak up or hide from most units. One of the chief complaints of the demo is there were no vehicles to build so nobody could make tanks and other fun stuff like that.... but some failed to see that the lack of armored units actually proved a point that in AoW, you can accomplish just as much with infantry supported by air units as you could with a large number of tanks.

[AgmLauncher]

Im not even going to bother arguing with you. You havent got a CLUE how to play CCG properly or what the tactics/stratgies are in that game. If you're looking for ultra realism in a game (a mere personification of real life) then go become an arm chair general in the army. Im tired of people criticizing CCG and ZH when they dont know anything about it :madred:

[tenebra_uk]

Just popping in to say chill out, before this degenerates ;)

[Nuclear Whale]

Ya, tenebra's rite, Im sorry, I didnt mean to be hostile.

All I am saying is that I reli hope this game becomes more then just a simple "click and bash" like Warcraft III has sadly become. Im just hoping for something a little more...grander. Something that doesnt involve to simple hero/lone unit Rushes or who can crank out units faster...thats all.

(Now dont get me wrong, Im a fan of rushes, just not rushes 1 minitue into the game)

[Eltaco]

I think they did a good job of making each unit useful. Look at the Commando in the demo.

And it was actually very easy to beat a guy by just massing tanks in CCG as well as other modern combat games. Lets look at China in CCG. Gattling Tanks shred infantry, Battlesmasters swarm enemy tanks, ECMs in the front of your army makes enemy rockets useless, Inferno Canon pound structures. Plus leaving a couple Overlords or Emporers at your rear stops enemies from screwing you over with a nasty trick I call "Back door attack"

Problem is simple, why make slow moving tiny soldiers, when you can get a big mean looking tank. And since most RTS gamers aren't war gammers, tactics usually come after looks.

[AgmLauncher]

See this is the thing. So many people just dont know about CCG ZH. Want to hear something funny? The China Tank general actually annihilates USA not with tanks, but with infantry. Troop crawlers are only 1200 for that general, so it's easy to mass veteran redguard. Combine them with some Tank hunters and you can REALLY do significant damage to a USA general. GLA makes good use of rocket soliders early on through use of forward tunnels and later on in Battle Busses. The USA Missile Defender's Laser Lock capability is indepensable throughout each stage of the game. Infantry play a big big big role in CCGZH, you have to use them right though, it takes skill and knowledge of the game.

On top of that, each general actually has various different strategies and BOs it can use. Look at USAF general. Against China and Nuke it's best to use Comanches and Missile Defenders. Against Tank it's best to use humvees and ambulances, against Infantry it's best to use humvees and King Raptors. Furthermore, depending on what you see your opponent doing, you can change up what units you use. For instance you might choose to use Combat Chinooks instead of Comanches. Each general has enough variety and a good amount of redundancy in its units that you can play each general with a particular play style or strategy. Each strategy or play style will put a DIFFERENT emphasis on DIFFERENT units. Some rely more on tanks, some rely more on aircraft, some rely more on infantry.

CCG ZH is a brilliantly designed game. There are so many options available once you get to know the game. I sincerely hope that Act of War copies CCG ZH as closely as possible. While some of you might not realize that that's actually a good thing now, you might in the future. Take my word for it, Im the closest thing there is to an authority on all things related to CCG ZH. There is way way way more too it than basic tank rushing. You CAN attack with just tanks, or use just tanks if you want, but against a good player you'll find that you need to find a use for nearly everything at your disposal.

[I3ag_OF_I3ones]

Ya this is true. Well AGm overlooked one point there that GLA never makes rebels and USA rarely makes rangers, i think theres a ratio of 5 rocket troops to 1 mg. However for china its different because you actually make vehicles that come with rifle armed troops, theyre not great and are nothing compared to tanks but hey theres lots of them and you can get em fast. Looking at USA in generals you see an anti tank faction with no good way of killing infantry untill they get snipers so china prefers to overrun them with troop crawlers that come with 8 red guards. Thats the only matchup i guess where you can actually see infantry fight. As for other matchups yes its panzer attack 2020, and Agm, infantry in humvees dont count, its just an uber humvee. Atacking China and GLA with infantry is pointless cuz of gatling tank and quad cannon. ZH is a great game with very deep gameplay and some strategies that developers never though they created however it became sort of warcraft of modern warfare.

[AgmLauncher]

I was talking about Laser Lock making MDs useful more than anything really. Good laser lock micro is really ownage. The fact of the matter is that CCG actually has a very good mix of tanks/infantry. If you're looking for something less "panzer attack 2020" which I assume is thought to be a negative of the game (even though it's basically wrong), you'll end up with DoW, which is just pure infantry. There is nothing wrong with the way CCG is. More RTS games ought to mimic it tbh.

Anyone who thinks that it's nothing but a tank rush game, you're quite simply wrong. If you're looking for more useful infantry, play DoW, BFME, or RTW. Infantry has it's place in modern warfare games, I mean what kind of stuff are you looking for from the infantry?

[Masterblaster89]

I think I have found out what the tankers for(for those who don't know). From what I have read theres going to be oil fields for a resource, thus you need something to get the oil. Obviously the oil tanker does this from the refinery. Im going to enjoy tanker hunting:devil:

[Aluka]

I'm wondering if TFT is going to have some cannon-mounted unit... Maybe some version of "striker". Anyway it would be strange for them not to have cannon support.

[Aluka]

Sorry for doubleposting, but i just can't wait.
Here are 2 images, i've taken from official screenshots. Seems like developers are hidding from us some aircraft uberunits. How do you think, what could it be?

[Masterblaster89]

Its probably the super weps for the game like tactical nuke or something
mayble you just have to buy the air strike or bomb strike or build a special building to open it up

[STCAB]

I wonder how many units will be from "other" countries that are not playable in the game.

I know there will be some british units in there. But I also wonder how many other. For example... If US/TFT figures out that there are terrorists hiding in ANY european country, OF COURSE that country want to do something about it.

So in some SP missions. A part from your regular units. You get a handfull "Special" units from the country the mission is set in.

EDIT: Like in the demo... "lets leave the egyptians out of this."

[AgmLauncher]

Im guessing it's safe to assume that the Combat Units listed on the official site for USA and TFT are not the complete unit vehicle sets? The Paladin is missing from the USA faction set as it seems they ran out of space.

[Masterblaster89]

Maybe the Paladin is only available in the campaign:weirdblue

[phoenixstar]

Originally posted by Aluka
Sorry for doubleposting, but i just can't wait.
Here are 2 images, i've taken from official screenshots. Seems like developers are hidding from us some aircraft uberunits. How do you think, what could it be?

hey aluka,

I don't know about the one on the left, but the one on the right is definitely an F23 Widowmaker II. Unfortunately, the developers decided to give this American built plane to the Consortium. If you want some actual info google Northrop Grumman F23.

On the attachment I forgot where I got this, but the guy who did it, has some talent!

[Aluka]

Originally posted by phoenixstar
hey aluka,

I don't know about the one on the left, but the one on the right is definitely an F23 Widowmaker II. Unfortunately, the developers decided to give this American built plane to the Consortium. If you want some actual info google Northrop Grumman F23.

On the attachment I forgot where I got this, but the guy who did it, has some talent!
lol, i'm military fan, i know what YF-23 is (by the way isn't it's name "black widow"?), got plenty photos and even a model.
But actually i've interested what purpose does it have. I believe it's not a superweapon, since sw for the consortium seems to be "starfall" thing.
As for american plane being "C" unit i have an idea. Probably consortium is being financed by some us manufacturers, who want to take down us goverment. It was said: "If the enermy is among us we will bring em to justice". As stanislavsky (i believe, but not sure) said "if there's a rifle on the wall, it will shoot".

As for tft plane - im pretty sure, it's some sort of unmanned x-craft.

[BOMBLORD]

I dno't think that they will make the f-23 relly "UBER" .the f-23 is just a relly fast bomber.maybe it will be immpossible /harder to kill than other aircraft.

[carnage]

CCG/ZH is the best RTS i have played bar none. Infantry is used extensively in the game. no infantry = loss. when they designed the game they wanted to nake tanks less effective, to get away from tank rushes. Infantry better be as strong in this game or else it will just beccome a tank rush game. tanks were effective in CCG but only with anti infantry/anti air units which. if this game is as good as CCG/ZH then they will have done very well. The only thing lacking was support.

[Masterblaster89]

Yeah isn't the starfall like fallen sattalites that they slam into earth. Like they reprogram them or something. That'll be fun:D

[Aluka]

Just studied several unofficial screenshots, and you know, i have some fears about tft. I've seen plenty units for us and consortium, but tft doesn't seem to have "lots" of technologies. If it's going to be the same thing as with the "rohan" in bfme - i don't know if i'll like it. Rohan tech ended very fast (in fact rohan had only one tier of development), leaving no fun.

[Masterblaster89]

hmm maybe they have less tech because they already have state of the art stuff.

[Aluka]

I've noticed they don't seem to have any artillery support and that's wierd.

[BOMBLORD]

I just recomand you to w8 for the full game and see.

[Masterblaster89]

Yeah they do its that HUGE cannon they can build in their base then when they want to have arty they call it down if its in range. As for a unit I think they might have something....well who knows well find out sooner or later:)

[Aluka]

Recently i discovered that they seem to have mortar upgrade for Stryker. Also MCS upgrade is available (wich i think makes stryker some sort of light tank).
And there's some strange thing, i saw on the other screenshot. Looks like TFT has Mecha!

[Eltaco]

I saw a drawing a while back that was some sort of marine exoskeleton, that might be your Mecha.

By the way can anyone tell me the difference between a Bradley, Hummer and the M113. Don't they all sorta have a similar function. (anti infantry support and transport)

[Aluka]

I saw a drawing a while back that was some sort of marine exoskeleton, that might be your Mecha.
Exactly. Exoskeleton. I've just forgotten this word :biggringr.

About recon/support/transport - guess you're right. (By the way, it's HMMWV or Humvee, not Hummer) Yes, they could make only one vehicle, but heaving all three is more realistic. Probably they are being unlocked on different defcon levels.

[Masterblaster89]

Aluka is probably right about the Defcon thing. I know someone in the Marines and he says that the army uses Bradleys and the Marines use Humvees as for the other vehicle I am not sure. I know for one thing when you send out tanks you better cover them with some type of AA vehicle or troop because soon as the AA is gone BOMBS AWAY!!!!:)

[jmurphy]

Also M113 is more of an armored personel carrier, the bradly is basicly a light tank with the ability to carry infantry, and the humvee is essentialy a fast, lightly armored truck with a gun.

[BOMBLORD]

in desert combat ,for example,I allways treat the bradly as a battle can.but still ,a pawerfull battlecan

[BOMBLORD]

can anybod help me ? I got a problam that I can't post anything in the US forum .it askes me to login even if I am loged in allready

[Aluka]

I think i've identified FTF plane from the AP icon. It's "Northrop Grumman Aircraft with Variable Forward Swept-Wing Project". There are references to it's nickname as "Switchblade", and according to some rumors it's designation is YF-27.
However officially it's just patent and some aerodynamic calculations.
Im just wondering if this unit will really appear in AoW, or is this picture just decorative thing.
Here's the picture from the Patent:

[BOMBLORD]

nice picture.complete with angel degrees.but what is the purpus of this aircraft ?

[Aluka]

I think it's to replace FB-111.
But i even don't know, if it will appear in the game. Probably it was concieved on earlier stages of gamemaking, but then taken out, leaving just icon.
If it'll present in the game - im sure it'll have a nuclear payload.

[Masterblaster89]

It looks like a super fast strike plane.:biggringr

[Eltaco]

Originally posted by Masterblaster89
It looks like a super fast strike plane.


Yep, looks to me like that too. If it is in, hopefully it isn't as imbalanced as those stupid alpha auroras in ZH.

[carnage]

if you let them get alpah auroras then you deserve all that comes with them. still they can be beaten.

[Aluka]

Here's another picture, which is very similar to ingame icon:

[nx306]

the icon is just to turn on/oof the aircraft/SW panel and might not represent any ingame unit

[Aluka]

That's odd :rolleyes:.

[BOMBLORD]

well.for some GUI I saw a F-15.and he IS being used in game.so...that aircraft will probbly be ingame.the aircraft is VERY VERY semilier to the su-37 ! (another american expensive shiny new toy...... without insulting anyone)

[Masterblaster89]

I now know that I will have a cr@p load of AA if those things are going to be zipping around. If it flys it can be shot down.....hopefully. If not then those Coalition SAMs are going to be very handy or what ever else is at hand those rail gun turrets were appealing.

[Masterblaster89]

I thought the SU-37 was a russian plane?

[simonnance]

The SU-37:
http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ac/row/su-37.htm

it IS Russian (SU=Sukhoi)

and it looks nothing like the forward-swept-wing plane we are discussing. Though it does have similarities with the F-15E, at least in very vauge looks and in role.

[Masterblaster89]

I hope TFT or the Army gets F-117's, I always liked those.

[Masterblaster89]

Hey has anyone found out what the Guardian Tank does. My guess is that something pops out of the opening of the tank and whats the deal with all those sattalites. Maybe its a tank like the ECM in generals. Well who knows cause I wanna know. :D

[Aluka]

It doesn't look like Su-37. Probably it shares some ideas with Sukhoi S-37 prototype, which by the way already has it's real name - Su-47.

And by the way, i've niticed that some units didn't make it into multiplayer. MiG-21 and F-18 for example. It's sad cuz i always thought more units=more fun.

[BOMBLORD]

ya.I ahve forgetten that su-37 is a pro-type....silly me:confusedb so the arabs will probbly have this.all terrorists have russain weapons.beacus the soviats are "bad" and the USA are "good" .(hate that......)

[MetalPhoenix]

Well most Third World countries use Soviet stuff since it's cheap.

[BOMBLORD]

realible,and does the job done ;)

[Masterblaster89]

Why do you think you can find an AK in almost every home in Iraq.

[BOMBLORD]

I woulden't say EVERY home.but in gaza,a good present for your 13th birthday is a kalashnikov .
cheap,easy to build and maintaine,realible,good fire power,very easy to use(my friends dad showed haw to reloed and fix jam .and thos thing make the AK 47/74 (U)/ak 103 + series a very good choice for the begginer/expert terrorist.

[Masterblaster89]

Thats cool:D The coolest thing I've shot is a .357 Desert Eagle. Now that was fun

[BOMBLORD]

I assume that there is onehell of a backfire from it,doesn't it ?

[Aluka]

I had a chance to "taste" RPKM machinegun in leteunant school :p:.

[Masterblaster89]

Yeah if you don't hold it correctly it will break your wrist. Mine was sore just from shooting it.

[DEATH eVADER]

Originally posted by painfulsunrise
Actually infantry will play a major role in this game.

The developers have said that if you use just tanks you will figure out what a bad tactic that is because enemy infantry can strike you from all over.

Infantry will be realistic in the sense that they can be run-over as well.

Yeah thats what I like to hear.

How is the AI, is it possible that when you select multiple infantry Infantry units, they will automatically do a pincer movement on an enemy tank (if you attack it)

[Masterblaster89]

That would be sweet, please explain the pincer tactic I've never heard of it.:)

[AgmLauncher]

I dont think the AI's that detailed.

[BOMBLORD]

could be .maybe it is THAT detailed.

BTW yo know that the desert eagle is an isrealy weapon in it's origin :D
gun (http://world.guns.ru/handguns/hg44-e.htm)

[Masterblaster89]

Yeah I know, you need to order the .50 caliber Desert Eagles from there if you want one thats reliable

[DEATH eVADER]

Originally posted by Masterblaster89
Thats cool:D The coolest thing I've shot is a .357 Desert Eagle. Now that was fun

You want a .50 :biggringr

[Masterblaster89]

Why not, spendy though

[taskforce13]

how many are they any us tft terrorist and then who is next?:confused:

[nx306]

US, TFT, "terrorists".... that's all

[taskforce13]

ok thank you:(

[Aluka]

What do you guts think of TFT unmanned missile unit? What's this unit's purpose?
TFT and Consortium tech trees were posted at planet-AoW, and from simple analysis of them we can say that there are 2 tires. On the first both factions get the following combat vehicles:
-APC (StrykerICV for TFT and BTR-80 for C)
-Light Armor/AA (ChenowthBuggy for TFT and Tunguska for C)
-Light Tank (StrykerMGS for TFT and AMX-10R for C)
-Light Artillery (StrykerMCV for TFT and Nona for C)
The second tire:
-Fighter (FA-35 and YF-23)
-Heavy tank (Unmanned thing with gun and Akula)
-Stealthy Recon Unit (GlobalHawk and Fennek)
-Heavy Artillery (Piranha III and "?")
Does it mean that unmanned missile unit is MLRS vehicle? What do you think?

[Aluka]

Oh, god! A nasty typo in the first row :weirdblue

[Aluka]

Recently i've found a new info for "SwitchBlade" aircraft (A forward sweptwing plane, depicted on TFT aircraft panel icon). The plane will appear in upcoming "Stealth" movie. And the most exciting thing about it - in the movie it's called Talon!
Here are screenies and the info:
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/aircraft/fa-37-pics.htm

[BOMBLORD]

maybe an interasting connection to AOW :p: :cool: ?anyway aluka,thanks for putting that out.

[taskforce13]

Nice! I like the tft commandos but i wan't mor infantery to the TFT!!!:(

[I3ag_OF_I3ones]

ifnantry is too generic

[phoenixstar]

how about that missile silo that's at the demo menu, that looks like the animation for a submarine launched Tomakawk. No, I'm not saying that they should have put that at sea, I'm saying I'm impressed that they thought enough to follow the actual launch sequence & more importantly this is a unit/building structure that is shown on Planet ActofWar site. Now we know what comes out of it.

Sorry if I maybe stating the obvious for some, but I just thought it's awesome.

[jmurphy]

http://www.gamespot.com/pc/strategy/actofwardirectaction/screens_6104896.html?page=2 There is another consortum unit shown here with a balaclava on his head.

[LOrd_FraG]

Looks like a special unit. The unit has glasses, infrared? Maybe the counterpart of the Deltaforce-Team from the TFT(Task Force Talon)?=>The Deltaforce-Team can see stealth units, this unit too?:weirdblue

[Kiev_Axe]

looks like the usaf speical forces in early build to me.
Its an early screenshot.
I doubt its a consortium unit firing amongst the US rangers with US tanks.

[Masterblaster89]

Maybe they were going for a CT look:)

[taskforce13]

LOL yes... But i think those guys is in the American army. Becouse they got the same colour as the american sniper and the ranger:rolleyesa :biggringr